If this is your first visit, be sure to
check out the FAQ by clicking the
link above. You may have to register
before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages,
select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below.

***R&D Thread: Aluminum 1 Piece Cap'd Valve Body

Here it is again...Valve only discussion please!

Feel free to add your thoughts. I think it should be based on the following design but 1 piece. If you are interested and have some money to burn then let me know and we will start a list. If not feel free to add your positive thoughts and constructive criticism.

Ive been wanting to do this myself for years. Then a few years ago I saw Deus' thread on the caps and thought it would have taken off shortly after. My opinion, it wouldn't be hard to make this function with a solid valve. In other words, no cap. Just a new valve machined without the threads for the regulator. My, thoughts since have mostly been on cleanliness. If done like the original design, there has to be a passage drilled to get the air to the top of the on/off. Not a hard task to tackle, but then you would have to put a plug of some sort on the rear of the valve. Not, the clean look I would want. My thought was to instead drill that channel from the inside of the dump chamber and plug it there. Ive not taken the time to remove the power tube on any of my classic valves. So, im not positive that this is feasible. Until myself, or someone else does so and takes some measurements I'll remain hopeful at least.

As I've made clear in the other thread. I'm all for a front half that is as minimalist as possible. Basically just the dump chamber. On off. And a npt. Just waiting on his final design and price. Then it will be a matter of my funds at the time this comes up to order. Or preorder as I would assume it to be. But also as stated. If this will be an actual capped stock style just made out of al I'm out totally from the get go.

I said it twice in the other thread and I guess ill say it here too, how are you going to mill the ports for the on off with a one piece design? Its done from the back of the valve.

You cant go in from the front or you'll have a pretty good leak, can't go in from the inlet air because its not high enough or even close to being in line. It has to come from the back... open up a valve and peek around at it, you'll see.

Edit, Also, the only feasible way, is how agd already has it set up, with a small cap on the back... think about it.... the air comes in from the side, it goes backwards into the valve, then forward through the on off... even if you found a way to connect the on off port for air, how would you get air to it? The ports for the charge air and on off don't line up, unless they've made some new flexible drill bit I'm unaware of to drill a 90* hole half way in the valve.

I'm actually good with three npt inlets. 2 side and one rear. Rear would be useful if anyone used it for a pump with 12gs as it would alllow for a rear facing gauge. Drilling from the dump chamber might be an idea as well, it could be plugged and loctited. Could make the rear hole optional.

I'm actually good with three npt inlets. 2 side and one rear. Rear would be useful if anyone used it for a pump with 12gs as it would alllow for a rear facing gauge. Drilling from the dump chamber might be an idea as well, it could be plugged and loctited. Could make the rear hole optional.

I would say make sure the on/off is milled to accept a ULT.

You beat me to it. Drill it all from the dump. Then put a set screw in the one hole. Its not that big of a deal.

I said it twice in the other thread and I guess ill say it here too, how are you going to mill the ports for the on off with a one piece design? Its done from the back of the valve.

You cant go in from the front or you'll have a pretty good leak, can't go in from the inlet air because its not high enough or even close to being in line. It has to come from the back... open up a valve and peek around at it, you'll see.

Edit, Also, the only feasible way, is how agd already has it set up, with a small cap on the back... think about it.... the air comes in from the side, it goes backwards into the valve, then forward through the on off... even if you found a way to connect the on off port for air, how would you get air to it? The ports for the charge air and on off don't line up, unless they've made some new flexible drill bit I'm unaware of to drill a 90* hole half way in the valve.

If AGD has already done it the only way it will work, why have this discussion. My thought is to drill the hole above the on/off from the inside of the dump chamber and then plug the end of it that connects the dump chamber. Then, when drilling the hole for the field strip screw, drill it deep enough to connect with the previous mentioned hole. After that is done the small inlet hole, even in its stock location, will interconnect with the passage above the field strip screw and into the passage leading above the on/off. Another plug would need to be used above the field strip screw. I did, after my previous post, take some measurements and put together a simple drawing on paper. It can be done! Is it the easiest or most efficient manner? Maybe not. But as I mentioned before, I would like something that when finished looks clean and not like a modified part. Doing it this way would allow for the rear portion of the valve to have some additional milling to make it look, in my opinion, a little more refined. Again, its not impossible. Open up a valve and take a peek, you'll see.

I was also thinking of a new design of a valve with an intergrated body. It would allow for different setups like the Xmag and the MM09. Open your mind here or I will probably lose you......

What if you took the concept of the carbon fiber mod and had seperated the body at the feed neck? Mill the new valve with the rear part of the body all as 1 piece. You would need to use the classic powertube style with internal threading (I think). Then you could mill different fronts like Warp left/right and standard feed. You could also make the fronts with a built in freak barrel back as one piece. Then your freak tip would be the only thing you need to screw on.

I said it twice in the other thread and I guess ill say it here too, how are you going to mill the ports for the on off with a one piece design? Its done from the back of the valve.

Edit, Also, the only feasible way, is how agd already has it set up, with a small cap on the back... think about it.... the air comes in from the side, it goes backwards into the valve, then forward through the on off... even if you found a way to connect the on off port for air, how would you get air to it?

If I am understanding the valve function correctly, the only reason the air passage goes from the inlet to the back is to get regulated. If we are talking about a valve body strictly to be used with an external reg, which we are here, there is no need for the air to go back to the reg area, it can go straight to the on/off. This is why I posed the "t" channel. With three inputs, two on either side, one rear.

If AGD has already done it the only way it will work, why have this discussion. My thought is to drill the hole above the on/off from the inside of the dump chamber and then plug the end of it that connects the dump chamber. Then, when drilling the hole for the field strip screw, drill it deep enough to connect with the previous mentioned hole. After that is done the small inlet hole, even in its stock location, will interconnect with the passage above the field strip screw and into the passage leading above the on/off. Another plug would need to be used above the field strip screw. I did, after my previous post, take some measurements and put together a simple drawing on paper. It can be done! Is it the easiest or most efficient manner? Maybe not. But as I mentioned before, I would like something that when finished looks clean and not like a modified part. Doing it this way would allow for the rear portion of the valve to have some additional milling to make it look, in my opinion, a little more refined. Again, its not impossible. Open up a valve and take a peek, you'll see.

A) Feasible, most logical way, way that makes sense... that's what I said, not only way.

B) you don't need to rub "open up a valve, you'll see" in my face, I'm sure you and I had been the only two not blinded by aluminum in this project and actually thought of this problem... I'm literally saying for others to open it up and learn something, look at the air ports.

If I am understanding the valve function correctly, the only reason the air passage goes from the inlet to the back is to get regulated. If we are talking about a valve body strictly to be used with an external reg, which we are here, there is no need for the air to go back to the reg area, it can go straight to the on/off. This is why I posed the "t" channel. With three inputs, two on either side, one rear.

I get that, but your 1/8npt hole is half way up the valve, the on off hole is above all of that, did you even look at the valve as suggested? Nope

Why does everything have to lead to ********? This is R&D so everyone will have different opinoins.

Lets just brainwrite ideas and design what works. I have worked with XMT on a few custom projects now. I know he can do damn near anything for a mag if he has the time, basic design, and is provided funds.

I don't think any of us have all the answers. It just needs to be done right the first time.

I get that, but your 1/8npt hole is half way up the valve, the on off hole is above all of that, did you even look at the valve as suggested? Nope

Why are you so combative? We're all trying to work through this. I made a mistake. I did retake a look at the valve, and I did have my air passages confused. Its amazing how often you can take something apart and mess around with it only to realize its different than you remember.

I'm not trying to be combative... its just other than dboggs, nobody had really thought of that problem or brought it to light, that's the one and only hurdle in this whole thing and it seemed to be overlooked by everyone... but dboggs.

So then when I said take a peek the valve before you guys get too far with air ports and this and that for it, figure this out. Dboggs was the only one that made it apperent he did look at one.

It can have 17 npt ports in it if you want, but if they don't connect air to the on off it all doesn't matter. And dboggs idea has been the best so far, the problem is finding a super short threaded screw to fit a very small area, to not obstruct air flow from the port but be short enough for.the feild screw to thread all the way in... usually standard 10/32 set screws are like 3/16", may be to long for this

My reasoning for putting the passage to connect everything above the field strip was because there is already a hole being drilled and tapped in that location. So, cost differential shouldn't be anything there. Its just a matter of going a little deeper. As for the hole in the dump chamber, maybe. I'm assuming the machining for the dump chamber itself would be done on a lathe. So, that hole would more than likely be done on a mill. Another setup. But, since there wouldn't be any machining done for the regless end, might be a wash. Like I said before, this is something I've been wanting to do for awhile, I just don't have the resources to do it myself. I actually came close to chopping up a stock valve just to prove to myself that I wasn't crazy. Or wrong anyway, jury is still out on crazy. The final product I had in mind would be close, my best guess, about .750 shorter than what is pictured above.

I'm not trying to be combative... its just other than dboggs, nobody had really thought of that problem or brought it to light, that's the one and only hurdle in this whole thing and it seemed to be overlooked by everyone... but dboggs.

So then when I said take a peek the valve before you guys get too far with air ports and this and that for it, figure this out. Dboggs was the only one that made it apperent he did look at one.

It can have 17 npt ports in it if you want, but if they don't connect air to the on off it all doesn't matter. And dboggs idea has been the best so far, the problem is finding a super short threaded screw to fit a very small area, to not obstruct air flow from the port but be short enough for.the feild screw to thread all the way in... usually standard 10/32 set screws are like 3/16", may be to long for this

I think that 3/16" could be made up by modifying the field strip screw. Or just using a different screw altogether. I don't have access to any kind of CAD program right now. So alot of what im coming up with is just what I can draw on paper. Only so much to be expected from that.

My reasoning for putting the passage to connect everything above the field strip was because there is already a hole being drilled and tapped in that location. So, cost differential shouldn't be anything there.

Ok, so you're talking about drilling and threading it the same all the way through ? I was thinking drilling a smaller hole within a larger hole and having to tap both. Your way might be easier for sure. Eyeing up the FS srew profile, there seems to be a fair amount of room for a plug.

Ok, so you're talking about drilling and threading it the same all the way through ? I was thinking drilling a smaller hole within a larger hole and having to tap both. Your way might be easier for sure. Eyeing up the FS srew profile, there seems to be a fair amount of room for a plug.

Its not as much as you'd think, the FS hole is already within a mm or two from popping into the npt port. The plug could theoretically go into the npt hole, but not too high or it will obstruct the on off port again, and also not have anything to thread to anymore.

Its not as much as you'd think, the FS hole is already within a mm or two from popping into the npt port. The plug could theoretically go into the npt hole, but not too high or it will obstruct the on off port again, and also not have anything to thread to anymore.

What about moving the NPT port rearward 1/8" and drilling a second hole behind the FS screw to run through the NPT and up to the on/off passage?

Its not as much as you'd think, the FS hole is already within a mm or two from popping into the npt port. The plug could theoretically go into the npt hole, but not too high or it will obstruct the on off port again, and also not have anything to thread to anymore.

Correct. That's why I would tap the hole just below the inlet,plug it, then figure out what to do for the field strip screw.

What about moving the NPT port rearward 1/8" and drilling a second hole behind the FS screw to run through the NPT and up to the on/off passage?

You could. But if you're gonna do that, you'd be just as well off drilling the second whole and leaving the inlet where its at. Like you had mentioned before. I'm just trying to approach this in a way to do as little machining as possible and achieve the same end result.

Hurdle #2. Officially, what power tube is this taking? If I have to mess up anything id rather it be my spare classic valve to take parts from. Not buy brand new x valve parts etc. Which is what this was originally going to be threaded for....

Hurdle #2. Officially, what power tube is this taking? If I have to mess up anything id rather it be my spare classic valve to take parts from. Not buy brand new x valve parts etc. Which is what this was originally going to be threaded for....

My vote would also be for the classic power tube. I don't see any benefit either way. But, it makes more sense to me to have an empty classic valve sitting than a stripped x valve.

Also, something I forgot to mention. The dump chamber will need to be machined shallower on this. Tapping the hole for a plug there is kinda sketchy. There isn't an abundance of material there. I would suggest a dump chamber that's about a 1/4" shallower to get around this. So, slightly devolumized. Plus!?

No other takers on the drilled to order air inlet? Id really only want left inlet and rear port for a gauge, a plug on the other side would look ugly IMO... shouldn't affect cost, but xmt will just have to pay attention to specific orders

Yeah, and Id only want the left side to be different from other valves, haha. I really don't mind about a rear hole either, but if its available id do it. If I never put a gauge there at least a plug on the back would look like it belongs there, like a velocity adjuster for someone that doesn't know what it is

Although... the triple port could set up for easy pneumag options right off the valve.